The problem with your argument is that it's giving carte blanche to political zealots to resort to shooting their opposition in the face because it's "ok to shoot fascists", and also apparently ok to label your opposition as fascist without having to define that label or justify your labeling. Why does nobody ever answer that question? Seems like every time I ask this question I get some variation of "found the fascist", or deflecting like you've done. Why don't you just admit that you don't have a practical definition of what it means, and that you use the term to justify violence done by your team?
Occamsrazer
joined 1 year ago
How exactly do you define fascism though? Seems like that term gets used quite a bit.
Too many people in the world crave an identity that is original enough to be interesting, but not so original that it can't be quantified or defined by accepted or understood identity templates. They need to be able to put a name to their identity so they can talk about it.
With so much going on in the world beyond our control and maybe more importantly our increased access to news about those events, we need a way to process things that we can't influence, but that may impact us anyway. Stoicism can provide that in an increasingly secular society, where it used to be religion.
Maybe, but the only reason this is notable is because of an uptick that is from the literal opposite of Christian right wing.
Mass shootings weren't even defined before. We didn't talk about them because they weren't tracked. Even now the definition of mass shooting isn't settled, with some definitions having about a dozen per year, and others having about 2 per day.
After reading your comment I had to fight an almost overwhelming urge to buy a Nazi flag and rent out my house for the simple pleasure of screwing over renters. That's how fast it happens.
Glad we can finally get back to hating big pharma. They are a bunch of greedy opportunists, and always were.
I guess maybe we are using the terms differently.
I'm not the guy who tried to claim an insane murderer is somehow representative of an entire political party.
My whole point was that the cultural revolution was a disaster because of unchecked progressivism, and that more conservative voices could have averted the disaster. This was in response to an unhinged rant about conservatives being good for nothing and how they should be silenced. Not sure why I engaged in that insane premise to begin with, but anyway that's how we got here.
That's crazy, and now in order to remain competitive and get workers, other businesses will also need to raise their pay. Capitalism.